THE EFFECT OF MARKETING COOPERATIVES ON COST-REDUCING PROCESS INNOVATION ACTIVITY



11


The profits of the two firms and the welfare of the group that patronizes the co-op are then:

(24)


'

ΠI(3) =


(t-cI+cC


2
pC+pI)


8t


(25)


ΠC(3)


=0


(26)  MW('3) =(pC


-cC


cf )xC(3)


—tx.


'2


C(3)


Innovation Competition in the Mixed Oligopsony

In this stage, the two firms seek to determine their optimal innovation effort. Similar to the pure

oligopsony case, the problem of the IOF is to determine the amount of innovation that maximizes its post-
innovation profits minus its innovation costs, i.e.,

(27)


max ΠΙ(2,3) = ΠI(3) -I


(t + rI - rC - Pc + Pi )2

81


1     2

- ψrι


On the other hand, the problem of the co-op is to maximize the welfare of farmers that are
members at the time the decision to invest in innovation is being made (this group will be referred to as
the “pre-innovation membership”). As will be shown below (in stage 1), the pre-innovation membership
is the group that, by selling to the co-op at reduced prices in the pre-innovation stage, provides the co-op
with earnings that finance its subsequent cost-reducing innovation effort. Thus, even though the co-op
knows that its cost-reducing process innovation activity will result in increased input pricing that can
attract new farmers/members to the co-op at the post-innovation stage, when making its innovation
decisions the co-op considers only the welfare of farmers that finance its innovation activity (by
patronizing the co-op in stage 1).

Algebraically, the problem of the coop can be expressed as:
where
xC(1) is the share of the co-op in stage 1, MW(2,3) is the welfare of the pre-innovation membership
in stages 2 and 3, and
MW('3/1) is the welfare of the pre-innovation membership in stage 3. Solving the
problems of the co-op and IOF, we get their best response functions as:

(28)


max MW(2,3)


=MW('3/1)-IC=(PC


-c+rC


-cf ) xC(1)


1 ,2       1     2

2 txC (1)   2 ψrc




More intriguing information

1. Migration and Technological Change in Rural Households: Complements or Substitutes?
2. The name is absent
3. The Role of area-yield crop insurance program face to the Mid-term Review of Common Agricultural Policy
4. A Rare Case Of Fallopian Tube Cancer
5. Der Einfluß der Direktdemokratie auf die Sozialpolitik
6. AN ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF COTTON AND PEANUT RESEARCH IN SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
7. The name is absent
8. The name is absent
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent
11. The name is absent
12. The name is absent
13. A Study of Adult 'Non-Singers' In Newfoundland
14. The name is absent
15. The name is absent
16. The name is absent
17. The name is absent
18. The name is absent
19. If our brains were simple, we would be too simple to understand them.
20. Convergence in TFP among Italian Regions - Panel Unit Roots with Heterogeneity and Cross Sectional Dependence